“I do not discount the significance of the expressed wishes of a 13- and 14-year-old child but I am also to consider those wishes within the context of all of the evidence.
In Abbott v. Meadus, 2014 NBQB 18, at paras. 67-70, Baird J. stated the following:
[67] In this case, the children are now 14 and 12 years of age. Their views and preferences, although not determinative, do play a role in the ultimate decision to be made.
[68] Here I wish to refer to the Voice of the Child Assessment. Professor Nicholas Bala, a professor of law from the University of Toronto in an article titled, “The Voice of Children in Canadian Family Law Cases” established criteria that he believes the judiciary should consider when assessing the significance of a child’s wishes. The reason why I am including these criteria in this decision, is to demonstrate to the respondent mother in this case, the imperative we have as judiciary to consider those expressed views when children are at an age where their views should have some weight.
[69] In this case, the responding mother does not accept that these children have the requisite maturity to fully comprehend their choice.
[70] The criteria are as follows:
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Whether both parents are able to provide adequate care;
- How clear and unambivalent the wishes are;
- How informed the expression is;
- The age of the child;
- The maturity level;
- The strength of the wish;
- The length of time the preference has been expressed for;
- Practicalities;
- The influence of the parent(s) on the expressed wish or preference;
- The overall context;
-
-
-
-
-
The circumstances of the preference from the child’s point of view.”